The Apple vs. Qualcomm drama has taken a turn for the dramatic. Today Qualcomm has fired back its own complaint against the ITC, and filed a suit in California, claiming that Apple is infringing on Qualcomm's patents and that an import ban on the infringing products is justified. The suit is only against products which use modems "other than those supplied by Qualcomm's affiliates," which, presumably, means the Intel modems that Apple has chosen to use in some models.

Qualcomm claims that the six patents included in the suit are not part of any industry standard and that it is therefore not obliged to offer to license them as part of those standards. Qualcomm also released an interesting infographic PDF about the suit, as well, for anyone interested in how the company is choosing to market the details of the case.

Most of the patents in question don't seem to point to hardware (except #8,487, 658) but almost exclusively apply to optimizations in software to improve performance. Qualcomm's marketing fact-sheet doesn't do a great job of illustrating what each does since it reduces most things down to the technical level of "data super-highways," but you can generally understand it. Globally, they apply to methods of saving power, often while transmitting data, by cutting the right corners.

Qualcomm expects the ITC to respond in August, and that the case filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California will begin next year. Both the ITC complaint and the lawsuit are almost assuredly a response to Apple's suit filed earlier this year.

I hate to editorialize too much in this circumstance, but the content and complexity of this matter almost beg it. So if you don't want my opinion on the subject, you can stop here and consider yourself informed about the general details of the case.

Even leaving aside the curiosity that Qualcomm isn't also pursuing an action against Intel for being the manufacturer and supplier of the potentially infringing modems, I think it's fairly clear that this is just a counter-claim being made to force Apple to back down or commit even more resources to the fight. While it's possible their claims are legitimate, the timing is questionable. Meanwhile, Qualcomm is still in the middle of an FTC antitrust investigation, and in the press release for this lawsuit, it is advertising the fact that the patents involved aren't being FRAND licensed. It's stunning. That image alone, I think, is illustrative.

Regardless of opinion, this is definitely not the last that we will hear in the ongoing Qualcomm saga. The full press release is available below:

Qualcomm products mentioned within this press release are offered by Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries.

Qualcomm Incorporated (Nasdaq: QCOM) today announced that it is filing a complaint with the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) alleging that Apple has engaged in the unlawful importation and sale of iPhones that infringe one or more claims of six Qualcomm patents covering key technologies that enable important features and functions in iPhones. Qualcomm is requesting that the ITC institute an investigation into Apple’s infringing imports and ultimately issue a Limited Exclusion Order (LEO) to bar importation of those iPhones and other products into the United States to stop Apple’s unlawful and unfair use of Qualcomm’s technology. The Company is seeking the LEO against iPhones that use cellular baseband processors other than those supplied by Qualcomm’s affiliates. Additionally, Qualcomm is seeking a Cease and Desist Order barring further sales of infringing Apple products that have already been imported and to halt the marketing, advertising, demonstration, warehousing of inventory for distribution and use of those imported products in the United States.

“Qualcomm’s inventions are at the heart of every iPhone and extend well beyond modem technologies or cellular standards,” said Don Rosenberg, executive vice president and general counsel of Qualcomm. “The patents we are asserting represent six important technologies, out of a portfolio of thousands, and each is vital to iPhone functions. Apple continues to use Qualcomm’s technology while refusing to pay for it. These lawsuits seek to stop Apple’s infringement of six of our patented technologies.”

The six patents, U.S. Patent No. 8,633,936, U.S. Patent No. 8,698,558, U.S. Patent No. 8,487,658, U.S. Patent No. 8,838,949, U.S. Patent No. 9,535,490, and U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675 enable high performance in a smartphone while extending battery life. Each of the patents does so in a different way for different popular smartphone features; https://www.qualcomm.com/iphone-infographic While the technologies covered by the patents are central to the performance of the iPhone, the six asserted patents are not essential to practice any standards in a mobile device or subject to a commitment to offer to license such patents.

Qualcomm today also filed a complaint against Apple in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California alleging that Apple infringes the same six patents in the complaint filed in the ITC. The complaint seeks damages and injunctive relief.

Qualcomm expects that the ITC investigation will commence in August and that the case will be tried next year.

About Qualcomm

Qualcomm’s technologies powered the smartphone revolution and connected billions of people. We pioneered 3G and 4G – and now we are leading the way to 5G and a new era of intelligent, connected devices. Our products are revolutionizing industries, including automotive, computing, IoT, healthcare and data center, and are allowing millions of devices to connect with each other in ways never before imagined. Qualcomm Incorporated includes our licensing business, QTL, and the vast majority of our patent portfolio. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc., a subsidiary of Qualcomm Incorporated, operates, along with its subsidiaries, all of our engineering, research and development functions, and all of our products and services businesses, including, our QCT semiconductor business. For more information, visit Qualcomm’s website, OnQ blog, Twitter and Facebook pages.

Comments

It won't happen lol.
Apple knows that the government will be in their favor anyway. So they won't pay shit.

Phone_Addiction

Yeh but it's two American companies this time

TechGuy22

Yeah one is 20x bigger than the other and has lobbyists in the government.
Go figure.

KlausWillSeeYouNow

Lobbying is a non-factor in this. Qualcomm also has extensive lobbying activities; this won't be decided by lobbyists. This is also a good example of lobbying being neither here nor there — both companies may exercise their justified right to be heard, but that alone will not decide this.

VAVAMk_2

All major corporations have government relations divisions.

YaKillaCJ

Not even, Qualcomm is just as big as far as product, reach, government influence and lobbying. Maybe even bigger. The difference is Apple makes a product for $150 + $100 marketing and sell it for $800. Qualcomm mainly deals in chips, radios, charging, etc. They charge say $50 for product that cost $20. There product is bought by nearly every mobile device and cross every ecosystem unlike Apple. So Apple may have millions in use at a time, Qualcomm has billions in use.

Point is favorism won't be a factor.

RRHansen

I know this is a counter-lawsuit against Apple but Qualcomm are little shitheads. There are and have been antitrust lawsuits against them in pretty much every corner of the world. They are monopolistic, arrogant and put a lot of pressure on OEMs to use their hardware. There are billions of $ to be made every year in the mobile industry and therefore the big players are using increasingly dirtier tactics to get a bigger share.

It's all about choosing the lesser evil these days, at least for me. I used to just look at the spec sheet and the price tag and made my choice based on that. Then I started considering the software experience and now I also weigh in the garbage stories that come out about each company. I think Qualcomm is taking the BS crown and I want to try and avoid as much of their hardware as possible in my next phone.

DistortStatic

I find it really hard to believe that Apple is the lesser of 2 evils here, seeing as how they sue anything that moves

RRHansen

I've always felt their lawsuits were mainly against Samsung and that hatchet seems to slowly get buried. There's still some action and a recent lawsuit but not as much as before. Apple are no saints and I'm also too deeply invested in the Android ecosystem so at least for the foreseeable future I'll stay clear of their products.

As I see it, getting sued by governments and EU and whatnot for antitrust is a bigger "evil" than lawsuits against other companies for patent infringement.

DistortStatic

We'll just have to agree to disagree, I find actively trying to cut down any competition with constant lawsuits like a big bully to be more evil than trying to consolidate as much power as you can through taking advantage of business deals. Really they both aren't that great with ethics, I just can't stand bully companies who threaten everyone with lawsuits to get their way.

Nicholas Conrad

Nope, not agreeing to disagree: you're just wrong. apple is the most litigious tech company in the world, if you don't like ip lawsuits apple is the greatest of all the evils.

DistortStatic

....I said I thought Apple was more evil, and I agree with your point, I don't understand

Nicholas Conrad

Oops, i guess I got confused in the thread there, sry. That's some egg on my face 🙃.

master94

So we will be ignoring the supermarkets that were sued by Apple for selling apples (fruit)?

VAVAMk_2

They sued an apple company (the fruit) in Europe for having Apple in their name or something similar to it. They have zero shame. Nothing is too low for them.

Portzblitz

That's a shallow metric; What he says is right about Qualcomm, Ryne even alludes to it at the tail end of his short piece.

DistortStatic

I never claimed Qualcomm was right in this situation, I am only stating my opinion about which company is worse overall, and Apples behavior is more appalling to me than Qualcomms in general.

nachofrand

Qualcomm has driven mobile technology for years now. OEMs don't have to use Qualcomm parts. They could have used TI OMAP processors or broadcom modems but the industry chose Qualcomm. It's sad to think you think Qualcomm is a bad guy. We are where we are today because of them. They're not perfect, and neither is Apple, this is just a result of our capitalistic society. Neither company can afford to not have growth so ones trying to increase revenue (Apple) the other is protecting theirs (Qualcomm).

Just_No_Stop

Not entirely true. Qualcomm threatened and bribed its way to its position rather than just making the best product.

Think of it like this, everything Microsoft, Intel, Apple and Google have done that could be considered 'bad' for competition as a group has been done by Qualcomm.

nachofrand

That's ignorant if you actually think Qualcomm is where they are today because they made a mediocre product and bribed their way to the top. Qualcomm spends billions of dollars on research and development to drive the industry forward in mobile technology. They're awarded patents for their technology and they license their tech to business partners which enables them to make money from using Qualcomm technology. Just like everyone else, you don't like their business model. Develop new technology, secure a patent, and lease that technology for others to profit from. So it looks like Qualcomm are patent trolls, which they are, but they have enabled profitable businesses around the globe. HTC, LG, Samsung, etc. They all make money because of Qualcomm's technology. Those companies don't make all the technology needed to make a phone so they rely on companies like Qualcomm to buy parts from. Uber, Snapchat, Instagram and on and on. Companies that rely on mobile data have been using Qualcomm modems for years. This is all because of Qualcomm's modems. Qualcomm deserves to be rich. They make the most complex IC in the entire phone and there are many companies with business models based on Qualcomm's modems. Yet no one appreciates the tech that has single handedly put us in the position we are in today. There's no way we would be where we are today without Qualcomm.

Just_No_Stop

Qualcomm bot is in full flight tonight..

nachofrand

Lol..just hoping we all can appreciate the hard work and advances that have been made in the mobile industry because of some key players. Apple being one of them.

But this time around Apple is trying to downplay, again (classic), one of their component suppliers so that they can decrease their costs and increase their revenue since iPhone sales are stagnating. They have successfully convinced consumers that Qualcomm is the bad guy even though Qualcomm enabled Apple to become the richest company in the world.

Just_No_Stop

They are both bad guys.

Look, Both have done some innovative things, but both have done a LOT of dirty things to get where they are, Qualcomm is one of the worst in the industry, they make Intel look like a charity.

Qualcomm has abused its position, threatened rivals and leveraged its inferior technologies over better ones from rivals by way of its licensing terms. For every advancement and contribution they made to the mobile industry, they have also made moves that held it back for their own gain.

nachofrand

I'll agree with that. In my opinion that's the result of capitalism though. These aren't necessarily bad people running these companies. It's a game and whoever navigates it most successfully tends to do so at the expense of others unfortunately.

Nicholas Conrad

Really dude, really? "Thermonuclear war" ring any bells dumdum? At least this time apple gets to taste their own medicine for once.

Qualcomm pockets aren’t deep enough. Halting the iPhone sales? Nah, wont happen. That’s ’s main revenue stream. If they don’t settle this amongst themselves and it goes to trial, this will be a long drawn out process. Meanwhile, iPhones will still be sold on the market in the meantime. 😂

demarcmj

Yea, nothing interesting will come of this.

These things are always either settled or are drawn out to the point that the offending devices aren't even relevant any more. If this goes to court, it won't be over until the iPhone 12 is out.

TeeJay1100

Exactly.

blindexecutioner

Last time a judgment like this went against Apple Obama simply overruled it and allowed sales to continue. Samsung "won" that case. We have a different president now so who knows if he would do the same thing but I am sure Apple isn't too worried.

TeeJay1100

It's going to be interesting that's for sure. But I don't think  is worried and I think Qualcomm is trying to get some $$$ from them. Before it's all said and done, I think a back door deal will be done and things will go back to normal. Neither party wants the long drawn out court process.

nachofrand

It's actually the other way around. Apple wants Qualcomm to change the way they price their parts resulting in cheaper prices for Apple. So Apple is suing Qualcomm for the way they charge and Qualcomm is firing back. This is like stage 4 of this dick measuring contest.

illregal

HTC about shut them down a few years back. Thats when apple all of a sudden caved and started cross licensing all their stuff with HTC. So it's not impossible.

TeeJay1100

Shut them down?? Na, you might want to go relook that whole debacle again. It was in the interest for both parties to settle. Just like  settled with Nokia. Do you not remember  was awarded a ban on certain HTC devices by the United States International Trade Commission? That along with other things back in 2011/2012 hurt HTC and it began there quick fall!! Meanwhile.

John Doe

Meanwhile, Qualcomm is still in the middle of an FTC antitrust investigation, and in the press release for this lawsuit, it is advertising the fact that the patents involved aren't being FRAND licensed. It's stunning. That image alone, I think, is illustrative.

EXACTLY! Are they really that fucken stupid?

My guess is that the FTC can't fine them that much (I think the maximum is $100 Million) and the contracts with Apple are worth billions. But the FTC can make them change their practices which would allow competitors to come in and ruin their revenues.

Roger Siegenthaler

you say the maximum is $100 million, well the EU Commission might have something to say if the FTC suit goes through.

demarcmj

They specifically state that these particular patents aren't essential to any industry standard. FRAND doesn't apply here.

Max

I hope Qualcomm gets burned big time, they seem to invest a lot more money in lawyers and lobbying than in R&D and that's why Apple chipsets are beating Snapdragon in almost every benchmark despite being under development for less time. For the last few years every new Snapdragon chipset has basically been a small upgrade.

I also can't wait for Google to develop their own chipset or at least investing in creating another good option to Snapdragon chipsets.

Zsolt V

Who cares about some geeky benchmark , Apple fans?

What matters is that a Galaxy S8 has 50% more battery life then the equally sized iPhone 7, despite having a 7 Plus sized screen.

Max

So you don't care about benchmarks but at the same time post a battery benchmark? Ok, I guess?

Zsolt V

Battery life is a stat that matters to everybody, not just geeks. Sorry that you cannot see that.

How come Samsung could include a 50% larger battery AND a head phone jack in the same size, but better waterproofed package? Wow, the iPhone is ridiculously outdated.

Northern Libtard

You may want to check out some Youtube videos comparing the two under water...S8 waterproofing is NOT better than iPhone. Apple under-rates their water-resistance rating.

Does S8 have dual camera?

Or if we’re not into stats, want to know which has better resale value? Customer support? 3rd party accessory support? Better App Store? Lower audio latency?

Aren’t these things matter to EVERYBODY?

sproc

Well not sure about the Samsung but the pixel phone is going for the same price as iPhone 7's on swappa. Audio latency isn't a factor anymore. Both have plenty of accessories.

Northern Libtard

Audio latency is not an issue? How many real-time DJ/music mixing apps do Play Store have? Oh yeah, zero...there may be a few, but they are junk.

Too early to tell for Pixel because #1...not many are sold...#2 too new. And with software support of just 2 years, that resale value will drop like a rock.

cookiedoh!

You sound like a Samsung sheeple now. Just shh...

nachofrand

Not even arguing here. Just educating.

What the most power consuming part on a phone? The display. What's the iphone display resolution? What's the S8's display resolution.

That said, the iphone will ALWAYS be a more power efficient phone. They control the OS and they make 1 phone for their SoC's. All the power rails are very specific to that phone and they're not wasting any power anywhere. Qualcomm's Snapdragon on the other hand is a general purpose SoC. HTC might make a phone that needs more power to the camera than Samsung. So Qualcomm has to provide a power rail that enables that. This is also why Exynos SoCs tend to be more power efficient than the Snapdragon variants as well. They're made to only go in the Note or S variants so their power rails are specific to that phone.

Bob Marley

The Galaxy S8 does NOT have a 7+ sized screen. The 18:9 aspect ratio disguises this.

Samsung Defense Force

The S8 has a screen size BIGGER than the 7+ and has it in a much smaller body.

Who the hell cares about the 18:9 aspect ratio which by the way is the new standard.

Rod

New standard... For Samsung. Lol

Samsung Defense Force

You know what I meant.

Ammar

"which by the way is the new standard."

HAHAHAHA okay.

Samsung Defense Force

You know what I meant., Relax.

Ammar

Yes, you meant it's the new 'standard'. Still hilarious.

illregal

Thank you samsung defense force.. But 18:9 is not the new standard. Tried g6, went to u11. 16:9 is much better.

Samsung Defense Force

You know what meant. Calm down.

Zsolt V

You are right, the iPhone 7 Plus is 5.5" vs. 5.8"for the S8+. So it looks even worse for the iPhone.

Scr-U-gle

...and the S8 is slower than a iPhone 6s.

Half the performance, 2/5 the life due to restricted updates.

Works out to be about a 1/3 of a phone compared to a nearly two year old iPhone.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Samsung Defense Force

Slower in what an undetectable nano second when opening or closing an app AND in unscientific tests in which some random person opens random apps designed to run on a single core--when the Galaxy is an 8 core phone. Powering a display 4 times more dense and on an OS that's much more powerful?

Or are you talking about in areas that actually matter to everyday users.

Web browsing for example--which certain iPhones can't even do if you're on a phone call.

Or maybe how fast a mobile payment transaction is--even though your iPhone is severely limited in where it's payment system works.

Next time you talk about benchmarks, talk about the whole thing not just the single core scores.

Scr-U-gle

Firstly, where are these multi-core apps you talk about that don't exist.

Secondly, in raw power terms, which video conversion is a perfect example of, the two year old iPhone 6s destroys that latest Samboom!

Good luck holding a phone to your ear while browsing the web!

Ps my iPhone 6 can do other things while taking calls, I know that Samboom phones can explode into flames and burn out your car all while doing nothing, I guess you could call that, multi-tasking where it beats the two year old iPhone

Just_No_Stop

Apple chipsets do not 'beat' Qualcomm or Samsung chipsets. They are designed with very different OSes in mind and therefore work differently. They have faster single thread performance because iOS is much more single threaded than Android. Multi-thread performance is similar in benchmarks, but rarely, if ever, actually reaches the performance seen in benchmarks in normal iOS use, and boy does the A10 suck down the juice while doing it.

Apple bought out a company to design CPUs for it because no one was making CPUs that suited their needs. An A10 in an Android wouldnt work was well as an 835.

One last thing, I wish sites like this would stop quoting Geekbench scores, its almost worthless rubbish. Of course Geekkbench say otherwise, but they would, they have a product to sell.

Max

That's what I call trying hard to find explanations.

Ok, then let's leave out Apple and look how Exynos and Kirin chipsets are also just as good and even better in some tasks and metrics when compared with same generation Snapdragon chipsets despite being also relatively newcomers. The reason they aren't used more is because Qualcomm puts pressure with their licenses to force the market to use their chipsets, even Samsung uses Snapdragon only in the US because of the licenses, but last year they skipped it because the 810 was having the throttling and overheating issues.

Qualcomm has always won more marketshare by using lawyers and licenses than researchers and that's not new, that started many years ago and it's something that always slowdown innovations.

Just_No_Stop

Im not a Qualcomm fan, I said everything you just did in another post, but the fact about performance remains. Apples chips arent faster, they are differently fast.

nachofrand

You don't understand Qualcomm's business model. Yes, they have the largest law firm in San Diego. It's because they're a technology company. Not a consumer electronics company like Apple, LG, Samsung etc. They spend 1.5 billion dollars a year on R&D, a higher percentage of their revenue than most other companies. Why? Because they secure patents for technology that allow other companies to license their technology to make a competitive product. We are where we are today because of Qualcomm's technology that has been driving the mobile industry behind the scenes for years.

Also, you're forgetting Android runs on ARM architecture so Qualcomm has to lease ARM's ISA (at least). Qualcomm is limited by ARM's architecture for one. And two, benchmarks don't mean anything. Anyone can put more power to a cpu and crank out more IPCs. That said, whatever. Snapdragon isn't all about CPU performance (which is ARM anyway). Snapdragon is an SoC that integrates a modem, GPU, CPU, DSP, a ML core and more. When you're LG, you buy a snapdragon SoC because you know Qualcomm has integrated, tested, and written the software needed for all of those to work together. Now LG doesn't have to buy a 3rd party modem, hire a team of system integration engineers, integrate the modem with the SoC, and then hire a team of software engineers to write firmware to control the modem. You buy a Snapdragon SoC because of all the technology that comes with it. Also, Qualcomm makes far and wide the best modems in the industry and are the only company that has figured out how to be profitable developing modems. Data rates have sky rocketed due to the wireless tech that comes out of Qualcomm's R&D.

Man..smh..idk why everyone hates on Qualcomm. Apple plays this game on consumers where they make Qualcomm look like the bad guy because they're a more consumer facing company. Apple's iphone revenue has began leveling out and they're having a hard time with growth. So what do you do? Try and decrease their costs. So, they go after their suppliers. They're notorious for nickel and timing their suppliers. So what do they go after now? Qualcomm's business model. A now they're playing with all your heads. Apple wouldn't be the richest company in the world without Qualcomm's modems. Period.

Just_No_Stop

Hmm, 2 asshole companies fighting it out. Which side to choose? Neither i hope they both lose.

ALUOp

Apple should start selling yesteryear A-series AP to Android makers so QCOM can focus on collecting license fees all they want.

Matthew Howell

I personally think that both companies should be castrated, but I'm just a sick bastard that way.

BTW - If you want to ban my account for whatever reason, I think the correct term is IDGAF.

After reading what patents Qualcomm has involved in this all I can say is that unless the code was directly stolen and copied they can get bent. You shouldn't be able to have a patent on saving battery life in a specific type of device.

Rohan

I side with Apple and intel here. Qualcomm is bullying industry into using their technology. It holds parents on some common and vaguely termed technologies that while not required for standard, is required if you want to use the tech.

Just look at the first patent here, adjusting power to antenna to prolong battery life. Its very bahut, even if you look at filing itself. And it is a key factor if you want a usable battery life from any device.

And the fact that they are targetting just intel modem devices says it all about their real intentions

Ammar

Qualcomm is bitter about being a chip manufacturer/designer that cannot seem to compete with Apple who isn't even a chip manufacturer/designer.